Arminius ... your post triggered some new thoughts. New thoughts ... like red wine ... need time to age for a while before one knows if they have any merit.

Nonetheless ... I'm in the mood for sharing.

1) Let me repeat an earlier comment ... Are we in the midst of an epoch transformation and we can't see the forest for the trees?

2) The idiom ... "shut/close the stable/barn door after the horse has bolted."T

3) The law of unintentional consequences ... in attempting to expand the boundaries of their "homeland" ... the Europeans have lost their homeland.

4) At this point in the game can Europeans really expect to achieve what the Chinese have worked diligently to protect for thousands of years ... insulation and isolation?

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

The common denomination seems to be a romantic yearning to return to the past ... is this realistic?

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

The common denomination seems to be a romantic yearning to return to the past ... is this realistic?

1] The motto of Xi is what the Westerners (Europeans [with or without the Europeans in North America, Australia and other regions]) could and should imitate. But this is what the current globalists do not want to be realized.

2] Trump is probably not able and not powerful enough to do what I just have said (=> 1]). Also, he is probably a traitor.

3] Putin is probably the best example when it comes to restricting those globalists who own most major banks and/or major coporations. But Russia is - by far - less powerful than the USA.

4] The Brexit is no good example when it comes to a political union and a military alliance of Europe (at least: Old Europe), but the Brexit is a good example when it comes to the collapse of the EU, although the UK is - by far - not powerful enough to achieve this collapse. So, the Brexit is a good sign, if the Europeans want to see how the EU must be reformed. What Europe needs is a military alliance, the goal must be a political union, a federation, with borders like the Chinese wall, if necessary. The economic union must be included, of course. This all is not easy to do. At first there must be probably given a speech like Churchill's "blood, sweat and tears“ speech of 1940. What we now have in Old Europe is neither a militarty alliance of a political union nor an economic union for Europeans (but merely for globalists). Currently there is no chance for such an European fortress to be realized. But wait and see. Did you expect during the so-called "cold war" that the Soviet Union and its satellite states would start collapsing in 1989?

5] The state "Israel" is a singularity in history. There has never been such a very questionable founding of a state and such a very questionable "justification" (after about 1800-1900 years!).

Brings to mind the American sport "football" ... are you familiar with the game?

Until recently ... pick a date ... the 'globalists' seemed to be on the goal line ... a 'touch down' seemed imminent.

Recent anti globalist chatter and activities suggest they(anti globalists) are now in possession of the ball. Only time will tell if they will succeed in pushing the globalists away from the goal line ... a gargantuan task.

One thing is certain ... one side or the other will eventually 'score' .

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

pilgrim-seeker_tom wrote:Brings to mind the American sport "football" ... are you familiar with the game?

Until recently ... pick a date ... the 'globalists' seemed to be on the goal line ... a 'touch down' seemed imminent.

Recent anti globalist chatter and activities suggest they(anti globalists) are now in possession of the ball. Only time will tell if they will succeed in pushing the globalists away from the goal line ... a gargantuan task.

One thing is certain ... one side or the other will eventually 'score' .

I am not very much familiar with that kind of sport, but I know what you mean. And: I am in agreement with that.

But please note again that there are many problems: the negative demography, the military weakness and the political subservience to the gobalist's demands - all this works against the interests of a European political unity. So a merely economic unity of Europe does also works against the interests of a European political unity.

As you probably know, before the Chinese regions became unified and the first Chinese empire under "the first Sovereign Emperor of Qin", there was a long-lasting time of war, the so-called "Warring States period".

China's "Warring States Period".

China_Warring_States_Period.gif (80.17 KiB) Viewed 4166 times

In 221 BC, Qin conquered Qi. Qi was the final unconquered warring state. It had not previously contributed or helped other states when Qin was conquering them. As soon as Qin's intention to invade it became clear, Qi swiftly surrendered all its cities, completing the unification of China and ushering in the Qin dynasty. The last Qi king lived out his days in exile in Gong and was not given a posthumous name after death, therefore he is known to posterity by his personal name Jian.

The Qin king Zheng declared himself Qin Shi Huangdi, “The first Sovereign Emperor of Qin".

In the rule of the Qin state, the union was based solely on military power. The feudal holdings were abolished, and noble families were forced to live in the capital of China, Xianyang in order to be supervised. A national road as well as greater use of canals was used in order for deployment and supply of the army to be done with ease and speed. The peasants were given a wider range of rights in regards of land, although they were subject to taxation, creating a large amount of revenue to the state.

Maybe we will get the European unification after a civil war as it has taken place in the Ancient Roman times. So we will get "Marius“, a "Sulla“, a "Ceasar“ and at last an "Augustus“.

The Crisis of the Roman Republic - an extended period of political instability and social unrest, from about 133 BC to 30 BC. Social War (91–88 BC), between Rome and many of its Italian allies - Roman victory. Sulla's first civil war (88–87 BC), between Lucius Cornelius Sulla's supporters and Gaius Marius' forces - Sullan victory. Sertorian War (83–72 BC ), between Rome and the provinces of Hispania under the leadership of Quintus Sertorius, a supporter of Gaius Marius - Sullan victory. Sulla's second civil war (82–81 BC), between Sulla and Marius' supporters - Sullan victory. Lepidus' rebellion (77 BC), when Lepidus rebelled against the Sullan regime. Catiline Conspiracy (63–62 BC), between the Senate and the dissatisfied followers of Catiline - Senatorial victory. Caesar's Civil War (49–45 BC), between Julius Caesar and the Optimates initially led by Pompey - Caesarean victory. Post-Caesarian civil war (44–43 BC), between the Senate's army (led first by Cicero and then by Octavius) and the army of Antony, Lepidus, and their colleagues - Truce results in union of forces. Liberators' civil war (44–42 BC), between the Second Triumvirate and the Liberators (Brutus and Cassius, Caesar's assassins) - Triumvirate victory. Sicilian revolt (44–36 BC), between the Second Triumvirate (particularly Octavius and Agrippa) and Sextus Pompey, the son of Pompey - Triumvirate victory. Perusine War (41–40 BC), between the forces of Octavius against Lucius Antonius and Fulvia (the younger brother and wife of Mark Antony) - Octavius victory. Final War of the Roman Republic (32–31 BC), between Octavius and his friend and general Agrippa against Mark Antony and Cleopatra - Octavius victory.

Arminius wrote:Maybe we will get the European unification after a civil war as it has taken place in the Ancient Roman times. So we will get "Marius“, a "Sulla“, a "Ceasar“ and at last an "Augustus“.

The Crisis of the Roman Republic - an extended period of political instability and social unrest, from about 133 BC to 30 BC. Social War (91–88 BC), between Rome and many of its Italian allies - Roman victory. Sulla's first civil war (88–87 BC), between Lucius Cornelius Sulla's supporters and Gaius Marius' forces - Sullan victory. Sertorian War (83–72 BC ), between Rome and the provinces of Hispania under the leadership of Quintus Sertorius, a supporter of Gaius Marius - Sullan victory. Sulla's second civil war (82–81 BC), between Sulla and Marius' supporters - Sullan victory. Lepidus' rebellion (77 BC), when Lepidus rebelled against the Sullan regime. Catiline Conspiracy (63–62 BC), between the Senate and the dissatisfied followers of Catiline - Senatorial victory. Caesar's Civil War (49–45 BC), between Julius Caesar and the Optimates initially led by Pompey - Caesarean victory. Post-Caesarian civil war (44–43 BC), between the Senate's army (led first by Cicero and then by Octavius) and the army of Antony, Lepidus, and their colleagues - Truce results in union of forces. Liberators' civil war (44–42 BC), between the Second Triumvirate and the Liberators (Brutus and Cassius, Caesar's assassins) - Triumvirate victory. Sicilian revolt (44–36 BC), between the Second Triumvirate (particularly Octavius and Agrippa) and Sextus Pompey, the son of Pompey - Triumvirate victory. Perusine War (41–40 BC), between the forces of Octavius against Lucius Antonius and Fulvia (the younger brother and wife of Mark Antony) - Octavius victory. Final War of the Roman Republic (32–31 BC), between Octavius and his friend and general Agrippa against Mark Antony and Cleopatra - Octavius victory.

Blood, sweat and tears.

OurCrisis as an extended period of political instability and social unrest has already begun.

The Qin Dynasty illustrates once again that "Conquest" is the easy step ... finding a "glue" to hold it all together post conquest is the hard part. Empirical evidence frequently confirms that the shelf life of 'conquest' is short ... the Qin dynasty lasted a mere 15 years.

OTH the Han Dynasty which followed the Qin lasted 400+ years. Seems state adoption of Confucian thought ... which was not new ... was a decent 'glue'.

The kernel of the message of Christ is also a decent 'glue' ... love. Unfortunately, neither state or church embraced it ... both have consistently been mostly militaristic and greedy ... particularly near the top of the hierarchies.

Compelling arguments can be made that virtual Global Conquest was achieved twice in the past 72 years ... and both were squandered ... ergo ... they failed to find a 'glue' to hold it all together.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

The Qin Dynasty illustrates once again that "Conquest" is the easy step ... finding a "glue" to hold it all together post conquest is the hard part. Empirical evidence frequently confirms that the shelf life of 'conquest' is short ... the Qin dynasty lasted a mere 15 years.

OTH the Han Dynasty which followed the Qin lasted 400+ years. Seems state adoption of Confucian thought ... which was not new ... was a decent 'glue'.

The kernel of the message of Christ is also a decent 'glue' ... love. Unfortunately, neither state or church embraced it ... both have consistently been mostly militaristic and greedy ... particularly near the top of the hierarchies.

Compelling arguments can be made that virtual Global Conquest was achieved twice in the past 72 years ... and both were squandered ... ergo ... they failed to find a 'glue' to hold it all together.

Economic interests, especially monetary interests have become dominant. So politics is dominated by monetary interests. Actually, we do not have national politics or European politics, we only have globalistic politics, and this politics is monetary politics, because it is determined by monetary interests.

Why do we - for example - have such a global immigration into Western countries?1) The globalists are interested in a great crisis with a great war, because they gain from it very much. Result: They become more powerful.2) The large companies are interested in cheap workers. Result: They become more powerful.3) The immigrants are interested in using their children as demographic weapons for the conquest of all Western countries and in becoming as wealthy as the Westerners. Result: They become more powerful.4) The politicians of the Western countries are interested in continuance in their offices; so they have to support the other three main interests (see: 1), 2), 3)). Result: They remain as powerful as they are.

The first two (see: 1), 2)) are super organisms.The last two (see: 3), 4)) are organisms and "organs like puppets on a string" of the first two (see: 1), 2)).

Last edited by Arminius on Mon Sep 11, 2017 9:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Arminius wrote:Maybe we will get the European unification after a civil war as it has taken place in the Ancient Roman times. So we will get "Marius“, a "Sulla“, a "Ceasar“ and at last an "Augustus“.

The Crisis of the Roman Republic - an extended period of political instability and social unrest, from about 133 BC to 30 BC. Social War (91–88 BC), between Rome and many of its Italian allies - Roman victory. Sulla's first civil war (88–87 BC), between Lucius Cornelius Sulla's supporters and Gaius Marius' forces - Sullan victory. Sertorian War (83–72 BC ), between Rome and the provinces of Hispania under the leadership of Quintus Sertorius, a supporter of Gaius Marius - Sullan victory. Sulla's second civil war (82–81 BC), between Sulla and Marius' supporters - Sullan victory. Lepidus' rebellion (77 BC), when Lepidus rebelled against the Sullan regime. Catiline Conspiracy (63–62 BC), between the Senate and the dissatisfied followers of Catiline - Senatorial victory. Caesar's Civil War (49–45 BC), between Julius Caesar and the Optimates initially led by Pompey - Caesarean victory. Post-Caesarian civil war (44–43 BC), between the Senate's army (led first by Cicero and then by Octavius) and the army of Antony, Lepidus, and their colleagues - Truce results in union of forces. Liberators' civil war (44–42 BC), between the Second Triumvirate and the Liberators (Brutus and Cassius, Caesar's assassins) - Triumvirate victory. Sicilian revolt (44–36 BC), between the Second Triumvirate (particularly Octavius and Agrippa) and Sextus Pompey, the son of Pompey - Triumvirate victory. Perusine War (41–40 BC), between the forces of Octavius against Lucius Antonius and Fulvia (the younger brother and wife of Mark Antony) - Octavius victory. Final War of the Roman Republic (32–31 BC), between Octavius and his friend and general Agrippa against Mark Antony and Cleopatra - Octavius victory.

Blood, sweat and tears.

OurCrisis as an extended period of political instability and social unrest has already begun.

Arminius wrote:Economic interests, especially monetary interests have become dominant. So politics is dominated by monetary interests. Actually, we do not have national politics or European politics, we only have globalistic politics, and this politics is monetary politics, because it is determined by monetary interests.

Why do we - for example - have such a global immigration into Western countries?1) The globalists are interested in a great crisis with a great war, because they gain from it very much. Result: They become more powerful.2) The large companies are interested in cheap workers. Result: They become more powerful.3) The immigrants are interested in using their children as demographic weapons for the conquest of all Western countries and in becoming as wealthy as the Westerners. Result: They become more powerful.4) The politicians of the Western countries are interested in continuance in their offices; so they have to support the other three main interests (see: 1), 2), 3)). Result: They remain as powerful as they are.

The first two (see: 1), 2)) are super organisms.The last two (see: 3), 4)) are organisms and "organs like puppets on a string" of the first two (see: 1), 2)).

Arminius ... interesting meta imagery ... let me add this ...

The "super organisms" draw their power from the 'well' of "organisms" ... having always used money as the agency ... the bucket if you will. If the efficacy of money as agency ever diminishes the entire paradigm will collapse.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Arminius wrote:Economic interests, especially monetary interests have become dominant. So politics is dominated by monetary interests. Actually, we do not have national politics or European politics, we only have globalistic politics, and this politics is monetary politics, because it is determined by monetary interests.

Why do we - for example - have such a global immigration into Western countries?1) The globalists are interested in a great crisis with a great war, because they gain from it very much. Result: They become more powerful.2) The large companies are interested in cheap workers. Result: They become more powerful.3) The immigrants are interested in using their children as demographic weapons for the conquest of all Western countries and in becoming as wealthy as the Westerners. Result: They become more powerful.4) The politicians of the Western countries are interested in continuance in their offices; so they have to support the other three main interests (see: 1), 2), 3)). Result: They remain as powerful as they are.

The first two (see: 1), 2)) are super organisms.The last two (see: 3), 4)) are organisms and "organs like puppets on a string" of the first two (see: 1), 2)).

Arminius ... interesting meta imagery ... let me add this ...

The "super organisms" draw their power from the 'well' of "organisms" ... having always used money as the agency ... the bucket if you will. If the efficacy of money as agency ever diminishes the entire paradigm will collapse.

The current conditions of the planet ... the ECO system ... human relationships ... including human relationships with nature ... are sub-optimal. This circumstance is largely the consequence of human constructs ... in the broadest sense.

IMHO it's unrealistic to expect changes to human constructs will improve the situation ... a more likely outcome is things will get worse.

For those readers unfamiliar with the acronym SWAG ... Scientific Wild Ass Guess.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

It's all in the "G" ... the word "Guess" ... add as many adjectives as you like ... doesn't change anything ... when one talks about the "unknown" ... one is guessing.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

In recent news...a young Israeli entrepreneur working on opening up business opportunities in China for foreigners( i.e., Israelis), by connecting to young Chinesetbrough social media.

"These laowai or foreign influencers, as they call themselves, make short and often funny videos on their lives and thoughts in China. The videos are live streamed and their makers, many of whom speak Chinese fluently, interact uninhibitedly with the audience.

These videos get around 10 million views on Chinese social network sites like Weibo. With the Jewish entrepreneurial spirit in his genes, Gal Or dreams of building his future in China."http://news.xinhuanet.com

"...as China's social media flourishes, a series of cyber celebrities have popped up in the past three years. Among them, comedienne Papi Jiang has had a meteoric rise to fame, thanks to her short comical videos on topics ranging from family relationships to popular social phenomena.

Gal Or decided to capitalize on this trend. "I realized that I also want to be part of this entrepreneurship ... I also want to be part of creation and develop more and more cultural communication," he said, explaining his move."

The China phenomenon is no different than the old "Gold Rush" days ... and side effects like "Gold Fever" are in the picture as well.

You wrote in an earlier post ...

I'm thinking you speak in jest here. The martial arts are not going to help the Chinese,

You obviously have no idea of the essence of the martial arts ... very few Western people do. The pickle America finds itself in today ... vis a vis China ... is the result of the Chinese awareness ... the result of millenia of experience ... of martial arts phenomenon.

"Do not be influenced by the importance of the writer, and whether his learning be great or small; but let the love of pure truth draw you to read. Do not inquire, “Who said this?” but pay attention to what is said”

Pandora wrote:I have heard the emerging Chinese investors being compared to Jews in their financial takeover abilities. Obviously, they are not the same people, but they do have some similarities, especially when it comes to their keen interest in finances and monetary ambitions in general. That brings up an interesting question: if Chinese were pitted against the Jews in the war for financial power and supremacy, who would win?

HahahahahahahahaBoth of them are way too smart to become entangled in dumb shit like that.

Japanese take pride in believing they have Jewish blood in their divine tradition.

Pandora wrote:I have heard the emerging Chinese investors being compared to Jews in their financial takeover abilities. Obviously, they are not the same people, but they do have some similarities, especially when it comes to their keen interest in finances and monetary ambitions in general. That brings up an interesting question: if Chinese were pitted against the Jews in the war for financial power and supremacy, who would win?

The Jews could very well support and nurture the Asians’ gambling weakness (which, I think is part of their cultural collective superstitiousness). Because it’s part of their own culture, this mindset could be easily worked with and manipulated ( it’s not even introducing a foreign concept). It is their superstitiousness (or cultural beliefs) that will have to be addressed.